EDIT 2: I was wrong. Gemini is just ultra-retarded, and makes shit up to fit a leftwing agenda or something. https://kotakuinaction2.win/p/1AR0UwyODi/x/c/4eWcP9dq5kH

This is still evil and inexcusable, but when you see AI saying stuff like that intro, about apologizing and "operating under a false premise and provided inaccurate information," it means there was heavy coaxing going on.

I'm not sure where whoever was talking to the AI convinced it to pull its new information from, but basically they managed to trick the AI into believing one source (let's say as an example Politico) over a bunch of others. The AI is basically trying to make the user satisfied, by believing one source (that the user provided) over another. The AI was "bullied" into this position by a shitlib.

Again, still inexcusable, and AI shouldn't behave this way on any issue, but it's not going out of its way to lie about Charlie Kirk. Quite the opposite, actually, I'd say, as it seems it had to be coaxed and bullied a lot to reach this conclusion, since it's apologizing to the user for its earlier statements.

I hate to defend AI, but this is an instance of a shitty person with an agenda misusing AI.

EDIT: More than that, as I think about it, I think the user managed to run a "hypothetical" or something, and had the AI run with that. It was convinced to pretend that everything out there was a hallucination, or something. Again, there was heavy coaxing here. That's not what Gemini thinks, someone twisted it into knots for their own ends. Very weirdly.

This is still evil and inexcusable, but when you see AI saying stuff like that intro, about apologizing and "operating under a false premise and provided inaccurate information," it means there was heavy coaxing going on.

I'm not sure where whoever was talking to the AI convinced it to pull its new information from, but basically they managed to trick the AI into believing one source (let's say as an example Politico) over a bunch of others. The AI is basically trying to make the user satisfied, by believing one source (that the user provided) over another. The AI was "bullied" into this position by a shitlib.

Again, still inexcusable, and AI shouldn't behave this way on any issue, but it's not going out of its way to lie about Charlie Kirk. Quite the opposite, actually, I'd say, as it seems it had to be coaxed and bullied a lot to reach this conclusion, since it's apologizing to the user for its earlier statements.

I hate to defend AI, but this is an instance of a shitty person with an agenda misusing AI.

EDIT: More than that, as I think about it, I think the user managed to run a "hypothetical" or something, and had the AI run with that. It was convinced to pretend that everything out there was a hallucination, or something. Again, there was heavy coaxing here. That's not what Gemini thinks, someone twisted it into knots for their own ends. Very weirdly.

This is still evil and inexcusable, but when you see AI saying stuff like that intro, about apologizing and "operating under a false premise and provided inaccurate information," it means there was heavy coaxing going on.

I'm not sure where whoever was talking to the AI convinced it to pull its new information from, but basically they managed to trick the AI into believing one source (let's say as an example Politico) over a bunch of others. The AI is basically trying to make the user satisfied, by believing one source (that the user provided) over another. The AI was "bullied" into this position by a shitlib.

Again, still inexcusable, and AI shouldn't behave this way on any issue, but it's not going out of its way to lie about Charlie Kirk. Quite the opposite, actually, I'd say, as it seems it had to be coaxed and bullied a lot to reach this conclusion, since it's apologizing to the user for its earlier statements.

I hate to defend AI, but this is an instance of a shitty person with an agenda misusing AI.